Question 43: The Mission of the Divine Persons

SUMMA THEOLOGICA PARS PRIMA, TRINITY AND CREATION THE MISSION OF THE DIVINE PERSONS We next consider the mission of the divine persons concerning which there are eight points of inquiry. Whether it is suitable for a divine person to be sent, whether mission is eternal or only temporal, in what sense a divine person is invisibly sent, whether it is fitting that each person be sent, whether both the Son and the Holy Ghost are invisibly sent, to whom the invisible mission is directed, of the visible mission, and whether any person sends himself visibly or invisibly. FIRST ARTICLE Whether a Divine Person Can Be Properly Sent OBJECTION 1. It would seem that a divine person cannot be properly sent, for one who is sent is less than the sender. But one divine person is not less than another. Therefore one person is not sent by another. OBJECTION 2. Further, what is sent is separated from the sender. Hence Jerome says, commenting on Ezekiel, what is joined and tied in one body cannot be sent. But in the divine persons there is nothing that is separable, as Hilary says. Therefore one person is not sent by another. OBJECTION 3. Further, whoever is sent departs from one place and comes anew into another. But this does not apply to a divine person who is everywhere. Therefore it is not suitable for a divine person to be sent. On the contrary, it is said, I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me. I answer, that the notion of mission includes two things, the habitude of the one sent to the sender, and that of the one sent to the end whereto he is sent. Anyone being sent implies a certain kind of procession of the one sent from the sender, either according to command, as the master sends the servant, or according to counsel, as an advisor may be said to send the king to battle, or according to origin, as a tree sends forth its flowers. The habitude to the term to which he is sent is also shown, so that in some way he begins to be present there, either because in no way was he present before in the place whereto he is sent, or because he begins to be there in some way in which he was not there hitherto. Thus the mission of a divine person is a fitting thing, as meaning in one way the procession of origin from the sender, and as meaning a new way of existing in another. Thus the son is said to be sent by the Father into the world in asmuch as he began to exist visibly in the world by taking our nature, whereas he was previously in the world. Reply to Objection 1. Mission implies inferiority in the one sent, when it means procession from the sender as principle by command or counsel, forasmuch as the one commanding is the greater, and the counselor is the wiser. In God, however, it means only procession of origin, which is according to equality, as explained above. Reply to Objection 2. What is so sent as to begin to exist where previously it did not exist, is locally moved by being sent, hence it is necessarily separated locally from the sender. This, however, has no place in the mission of a divine person, for the divine person sent neither begins to exist where he did not previously exist, nor ceases to exist where he was, and such a mission takes place without a separation, having only distinction of origin. Reply to Objection 3. This objection rests on the idea of mission according to local motion, which is not in God. Objection 1. It would seem that mission can be eternal, for Gregory says, The son is sent as he is begotten, but the son's generation is eternal, therefore mission is eternal. Objection 2. Further, a thing is changed if it becomes something temporally, but a divine person is not changed, therefore the mission of a divine person is not temporal but eternal. Objection 3. Further, mission implies procession, but the procession of the divine persons is eternal, therefore mission is also eternal. On the contrary, it is said, When the fullness of the time was come, God sent his son. I answer that a certain difference is to be observed in all the words that express the origin of the divine persons, for some express only relation to the principle as procession and going forth. Others express the term of procession together with the relation to the principle. Of these, some express the eternal term as generation and spiration, for generation is the procession of the divine person into the divine nature, and passive spiration is the procession of the subsisting love. Others express the temporal term with relation to the principle as mission and giving, for a thing is sent that it may be in something else and is given that it may be possessed, but that a divine person be possessed by any creature or exist in it in a new mode is temporal. Hence mission and giving have only a temporal significance in God, but generation and spiration are exclusively eternal, whereas procession and giving in God have both an eternal and a temporal signification. For the son may proceed eternally as God, but temporally by becoming man, according to his visible mission, or likewise by dwelling in man according to his invisible mission. REPLY TO OBJECTION I. Gregory speaks of the temporal generation of the son not from the father, but from his mother, or it may be taken to mean that he could be sent because he was eternally begotten. REPLY TO OBJECTION II. That a divine person may newly exist in any one or be possessed by any one in time does not come from change of the divine person, but from change in the creature, as God himself is called Lord temporally by change of the creature. REPLY TO OBJECTION III. Mission signifies not only procession from the principle, but also determines the temporal term of the procession. Its mission is only temporal, or we may say that it includes the eternal procession with the addition of a temporal effect, for the relation of a divine person to his principle must be eternal. Hence the procession may be called a twin procession, eternal and temporal, not that there is a double relation to the principle, but a double term, temporal and eternal. III. Whether the invisible mission of the divine person is only according to the gift of sanctifying grace. OBJECTION I. It would seem that the invisible mission of the divine person is not only according to the gift of sanctifying grace, for the sending of a divine person means that he is given. Hence if the divine person is sent only according to the gift of sanctifying grace, the divine person himself will not be given but only his gifts, and this is the error of those who say that the Holy Ghost is not given but that his gifts are given. OBJECTION II. Further, this preposition, according to, denotes the habitude of some cause. But the divine person is the cause why the gift of sanctifying grace is possessed and not, conversely, according to Romans, the charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who is given to us. Therefore, it is improperly said that the divine person is sent according to the gift of sanctifying grace. OBJECTION III. Further, Augustine says that the sun, when temporarily perceived by the mind, is sent. But the sun is known not only by sanctifying grace but also by gratuitous grace, as by faith and knowledge. Therefore, the divine person is not sent according only to the gift of sanctifying grace. OBJECTION IV. Further, Rabanus says that the Holy Ghost was given to the apostles for the working of miracles. This, however, is not a gift of sanctifying grace but a gratuitous grace. Therefore, the divine person is not given only according to the gift of sanctifying grace. On the contrary, Augustine says that the Holy Ghost proceeds temporarily for the creature's sanctification, but mission is a temporal procession. Since then the creature's sanctification is by sanctifying grace, it follows that the mission of the divine person is only by sanctifying grace. I answer that the divine person is fittingly sent in the sense that he exists newly in anyone, and he is given as possessed by anyone, and neither of these is otherwise than by sanctifying grace. For God is in all things by his essence, power, and presence, according to his one common mode, as the cause existing in the effects which participate in his goodness. Above and beyond this common mode, however, there is one special mode belonging to the rational nature wherein God is said to be present as the object known is in the knower and the beloved in the lover. And since the rational creature, by its operation of knowledge and love, attains to God himself, according to this special mode God is said not only to exist in the rational creature, but also to dwell therein as in his own temple. So no other effect can be put down as the reason why the divine person is in the rational creature in a new mode except sanctifying grace. Hence, the divine person is sent and proceeds temporarily only according to sanctifying grace. Again, we are said to possess only what we can freely use or enjoy, and to have the power of enjoying the divine person can only be according to sanctifying grace. And yet the Holy Ghost is possessed by man and dwells within him in the very gift itself of sanctifying grace. Hence, the Holy Ghost himself is given and sent. Reply to Objection 1. By the gift of sanctifying grace, the rational creature is perfected so that it can freely use not only the created gift itself, but enjoy also the divine person himself. And so the invisible mission takes place according to the gift of sanctifying grace. And yet the divine person himself is given. Reply to Objection 2. Sanctifying grace disposes the soul to possess the divine person, and this is signified when it is said that the Holy Ghost is given according to the gift of grace. Nevertheless, the gift itself of grace is from the Holy Ghost, which is meant by the words, The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost. Reply to Objection 3. Although the Son can be known by us according to other effects, yet neither does he dwell in us nor is he possessed by us according to those effects. Reply to Objection 4. The working of miracles manifests sanctifying grace as also does the gift of prophecy and any other gratuitous graces. Hence, gratuitous grace is called the manifestation of the Spirit. So the Holy Ghost is said to be given to the apostles for the working of miracles, because sanctifying grace was given to them with the outward sign. Were the sign only of sanctifying grace given to them without the grace itself, it would not be simply said that the Holy Ghost was given, except with some qualifying term, just as we read of certain ones receiving the gift of the Spirit of prophecy or of miracles, as having from the Holy Ghost the power of prophesying or of working miracles. 4. Whether the Father can be fittingly sent. Objection 1. It would seem that it is fitting also that the Father should be sent. For being sent means that the divine person is given, but the Father gives himself, since he can only be possessed by his giving himself. Therefore, it can be said that the Father sends himself. Objection 2. Further, the divine person is sent according to the indwelling of grace. But by grace the whole Trinity dwells in us according to John. We will come to him and make our abode with him. Therefore, each one of the divine persons is sent. Objection 3. Further, whatever belongs to one person belongs to them all, except the notions and persons. But mission does not signify any person nor even a notion, since there are only five notions as stated above. Therefore, every divine person can be sent. On the contrary, Augustine says, the Father alone is never described as being sent. I answer that the very idea of mission means procession from another, and in God it means procession according to origin as above expounded. Hence, as the Father is not from another, in no way is it fitting for him to be sent. But this can only belong to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, to whom it belongs to be from another. Reply to Objection 1. In the sense of giving, as a free bestowal of something, the Father gives himself, as freely bestowing himself to be enjoyed by the creature. But as implying the authority of the giver as regards what is given, to be given only implies in God to the person who is from another, and the same as regards being sent. Reply to Objection 2. Although the effect of grace is also from the Father, who dwells in us by grace, just as the Son and the Holy Ghost, still he is not described as being sent, for he is not from another. Thus Augustine says, that the Father, when known by any one in time, is not said to be sent, for there is no one whence he is, or from whom he proceeds. Reply to Objection 3. Mission, meaning procession from the sender, includes the signification of a notion, not of a special notion, but in general. Thus to be from another is common to two of the notions. Fifth Article. Whether it is fitting for the Son to be sent invisibly. Objection 1. It would seem that it is not fitting for the Son to be sent invisibly, for invisible mission of the divine person is according to the gift of grace. But all gifts of grace belong to the Holy Ghost, according to Corinthians 1, and the same Spirit worketh all things. Therefore only the Holy Ghost is sent invisibly. Objection 2. Further, the mission of the divine person is according to sanctifying grace, but the gifts belonging to the perfection of the intellect are not gifts of sanctifying grace, since they can be held without the gift of charity. According to Corinthians, if I should have prophecy, and should know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could move mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. Therefore since the Son proceeds as the word of the intellect, it seems unfitting for Him to be sent invisibly. Objection 3. Further, the mission of the divine person is a procession, as expounded above. But the procession of the Son and of the Holy Ghost differ from each other, therefore they are distinct missions if both are sent, and then one of them would be superfluous, since one would suffice for the creature's sanctification. On the contrary, it is said of divine wisdom, Send her from heaven to thy saints, and from the seat of thy greatness. I answer, that the whole Trinity dwells in the mind by sanctifying grace, according to John. We will come to Him, and will make our abode with Him. But that a divine person be sent to anyone by invisible grace, signifies both that this person dwells in a new way within him, and that he has his origin from another. Hence since both to the Son and to the Holy Ghost it belongs to dwell in the soul by grace, and to be from another, it therefore belongs to both of them to be invisibly sent. As to the Father, though he dwells in us by grace, still it does not belong to him to be from another, and consequently he is not sent. Reply to Objection 1. Although all the gifts considered as such are attributed to the Holy Ghost, forasmuch as he is by his nature the first gift, since he is love, as stated above, some gifts nevertheless by reason of their own particular nature are appropriated in a certain way to the Son, those namely which belong to the intellect and respect of which we speak of the mission of the Son. Hence Augustine says that the Son is sent to anyone invisibly, whenever he is known and perceived by anyone. Reply to Objection 2. The soul is made like to God by grace. Hence for a divine person to be sent to anyone by grace there must needs be a likening of the soul to the divine person who is sent by some gift of grace. Because the Holy Ghost is love, the soul is assimilated to the Holy Ghost by the gift of charity. Hence the mission of the Holy Ghost is according to the mode of charity, whereas the Son is the word, not any sort of word, but one who breathes forth love. Hence Augustine says the word we speak is of knowledge with love. Thus the Son is sent not in accordance with every and any kind of intellectual perfection, but according to the intellectual illumination which breaks forth into the affection of love, as is said, everyone that hath heard from the Father and hath learned cometh to me. And in my meditation a fire shall flame forth. Thus Augustine plainly says the Son is sent whenever he is known and perceived by anyone. Now perception implies a certain experimental knowledge, and this is properly called wisdom, as it were a sweet knowledge. According to Ecclesiasticus the wisdom of doctrine is according to her name. Reply to Objection 3. Since mission implies the origin of the person who is sent and his indwelling by grace, as explained above, if we speak of mission according to origin, in this sense the Son's mission is distinguished from the mission of the Holy Ghost, as generation is distinguished from procession. If we consider mission as regards the effect of grace, in this sense the two missions are united in the root which is grace, but are distinguished in the effects of grace, which consists in the illumination of the intellect and the kindling of the affection. Thus it is manifest that one mission cannot be without the other because neither takes place without sanctifying grace, nor is one person separated from the other. Sixth Article. Whether the invisible mission is to all who participate grace. Objection 1. It would seem that the invisible mission is not to all who participate grace. For the Fathers of the Old Testament had their share of grace, yet to them was made no invisible mission, for it is said the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified. Therefore the invisible mission is not to all partakers in grace. Objection 2. Further, progress in virtue is only by grace. But the invisible mission is not according to progress in virtue, because progress in virtue is continuous, since charity ever increases or decreases, and thus the mission would be continuous. Therefore the invisible mission is not to all who share in grace. Objection 3. Further, Christ and the blessed have fullness of grace, but mission is not to them, for mission implies distance, whereas Christ as man and all the blessed are perfectly united to God. Therefore the invisible mission is not to all sharers in grace. Objection 4. Further, the sacraments of the new law contain grace, and it is not said that the invisible mission is sent to them. Therefore the invisible mission is not to all that have grace. On the contrary, according to Augustine, the invisible mission is for the creature's sanctification. Now every creature that has grace is sanctified. Therefore the invisible mission is to every such creature. I answer, that as stated above, mission in its very meaning implies that he who is sent either begins to exist where he was not before, as occurs to creatures, or begins to exist where he was before, but in a new way, in which sense mission is ascribed to the divine persons. Thus mission as regards the one to whom it is sent implies two things, the indwelling of grace, and a certain renewal by grace. Thus the invisible mission is sent to all in whom are to be found these two conditions. Reply to Objection 1. The invisible mission was directed to the Old Testament fathers, as appears from what Augustine says, that the invisible mission of the Son is in man and with men. This was done in former times with the fathers and the prophets. Thus the words, The Spirit was not yet given, are to be applied to that giving accompanied with a visible sign which took place on the day of Pentecost. Reply to Objection 2. The invisible mission takes place also as regards progress and virtue, or increase of grace. Hence Augustine says that the Son is sent to each one when he is known and perceived by anyone, so far as he can be known and perceived according to the capacity of the soul, whether journeying toward God or united perfectly to him. Such invisible mission, however, chiefly occurs as regards anyone's proficiency in the performance of a new act, or in the acquisition of a new state of grace, as, for example, the proficiency in reference to the gift of miracles, or of prophecy, or in the fervor of charity leading a man to expose himself to the danger of martyrdom, or to renounce his possessions, or to undertake any arduous work. Reply to Objection 3. The invisible mission is directed to the blessed at the very beginning of their beatitude. The invisible mission is made to them subsequently not by intensity of grace, but by the further revelation of mysteries, which goes on till the day of judgment. Such an increase is by the extension of grace, because it extends to a greater number of objects. To Christ the invisible mission was sent at the first moment of his conception, but not afterwards, since from the beginning of his conception he was filled with all wisdom and grace. Reply to Objection 4. Grace resides instrumentally in the sacraments of the new law, as the form of a thing designed resides in the instruments of the art designing, according to a process flowing from the agent to the passive object. But mission is only spoken of as directed to its term, hence the mission of the divine person is not sent to the sacraments, but to those who receive grace through the sacraments. 7. Whether it is fitting for the Holy Ghost to be sent visibly. Objection 1. It would seem that the Holy Ghost is not fittingly sent in a visible manner, for the Son, as visibly sent to the world, is said to be less than the Father. But the Holy Ghost is never said to be less than the Father, therefore the Holy Ghost is not fittingly sent in a visible manner. Objection 2. Further, the visible mission takes place by way of union to a visible creature, as the Son's mission according to the flesh. But the Holy Ghost did not assume any visible creature, and hence it cannot be said that he exists otherwise in some creatures than in others, unless perhaps as in a sign, as he is also present in the sacraments and in all the figures of the law. Thus the Holy Ghost is either not sent visibly at all, or his visible mission takes place in all these things. Objection 3. Further, every visible creature is, in effect, showing forth the whole Trinity. Therefore the Holy Ghost is not sent by reason of those visible creatures more than any other person. Objection 4. Further, the Son was visibly sent by reason of the noblest kind of creature, namely the human nature. Therefore if the Holy Ghost is sent visibly, he ought to be sent by reason of rational creatures. Objection 5. Further, whatever is done visibly by God is dispensed by the ministry of the angels, as Augustine says. So visible appearances, if there have been any, came by means of the angels. Thus the angels are sent and not the Holy Ghost. And Objection 6. Further, the Holy Ghost being sent in a visible manner is only for the purpose of manifesting the invisible mission, as invisible things are made known by the visible. So those to whom the invisible mission was not sent ought not to receive the visible mission. And to all who received the invisible mission, whether in the New or in the Old Testament, the visible mission ought likewise to be sent. And this is clearly false. Therefore the Holy Ghost is not sent visibly. On the contrary, it is said that when our Lord was baptized, the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the shape of a dove. I answer that God provides for all things according to the nature of each thing. Now the nature of man requires that he be led to the invisible by visible things, as explained above. Wherefore the invisible things of God must be made manifest to man by the things that are visible. As God, therefore, in a certain way has demonstrated himself and his eternal processions to men by visible creatures according to certain signs, so was it fitting that the invisible missions also of the divine persons should be made manifest by some visible creatures. This mode of manifestation applies in different ways to the Son and to the Holy Ghost. For it belongs to the Holy Ghost, who proceeds as love, to be the gift of sanctification. To the Son as the principle of the Holy Ghost, it belongs to the author of this sanctification. Thus the Son has been sent visibly as the author of sanctification, the Holy Ghost as the sign of sanctification. Reply to Objection 1. The Son assumed the visible creature wherein he appeared into the unity of his person, so that whatever can be said of that creature can be said of the Son of God. And so by reason of the nature assumed the Son is called less than the Father. But the Holy Ghost did not assume the visible creature in which he appeared into the unity of his person, so that what is said of it cannot be predicated of him. Hence he cannot be called less than the Father by reason of any visible creature. Reply to Objection 2. The visible mission of the Holy Ghost does not apply to the imaginary vision which is that of prophecy, because, as Augustine says, the prophetic vision is not displayed to corporeal eyes by corporeal shapes, but is shown in the spirit by the spiritual images of bodies. But whoever saw the dove and the fire saw them by their eyes. Nor again has the Holy Ghost the same relation to these images that the Son has to the rock, because it is said the rock was Christ, for that rock was already created, and after the manner of an action was named Christ, whom it typified. Whereas the dove and the fire suddenly appeared to signify only what was happening, they seem however to be like to the flame of the burning bush seen by Moses, and to the column which the people followed in the desert, and to the lightning and thunder issuing forth when the law was given on the mountain. For the purpose of the bodily appearances of those things was that they might signify, and then pass away. Thus the visible mission is neither displayed by prophetic vision, which belongs to the imagination and not to the body, nor by the sacramental signs of the Old and New Testament wherein certain pre-existing things are employed to signify something. But the Holy Ghost is said to be sent visibly inasmuch as he showed himself in certain creatures as in signs especially made for that purpose. Reply to Objection 3. Although the whole Trinity makes those creatures, still they are made in order to show forth in some special way this or that person. For as the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are signified by diverse names, so also can they each one be signified by different things, although neither separation nor diversity exists amongst them. Reply to Objection 4. It was necessary for the Son to be declared as the author of sanctification as explained above. Thus the visible mission of the Son was necessarily made according to the rational nature to which it belongs to act and which is capable of sanctification, whereas any other creature could be the sign of sanctification. Nor was such a visible creature, formed for such a purpose, necessarily assumed by the Holy Ghost into the unity of his person, since it was not assumed or used for the purpose of action, but only for the purpose of a sign. And so likewise it was not required to last beyond what its use required. Reply to Objection 5. Those visible creatures were formed by the ministry of the angels, not to signify the person of an angel, but to signify the person of the Holy Ghost. Thus as the Holy Ghost resided in those visible creatures as the one signified in the sign, on that account the Holy Ghost is said to be sent visibly and not as an angel. Reply to Objection 6. It is not necessary that the invisible mission should always be made manifest by some visible external sign, but as is said, the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man unto profit, that is, of the church. This utility consists in the confirmation and propagation of the faith by such visible signs. This has been done chiefly by Christ and by the apostles, according to Hebrews, which having begun to be declared by the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard. Thus in a special sense a mission of the Holy Ghost was directed to Christ, to the apostles, and to some of the early saints on whom the church was in a way founded. In such a manner, however, that the visible mission made to Christ should show forth the invisible mission made to him, not at that particular time, but at the first moment of his conception. The visible mission was directed to Christ at the time of his baptism by the figure of a dove, a fruitful animal, to show forth in Christ the authority of the giver of grace by spiritual regeneration. Hence the Father's voice spoke, This is my beloved Son, that others might be regenerated to the likeness of the Only Begotten. The transfiguration showed it forth in the appearance of a bright cloud, to show the exuberance of doctrine. And hence it was said, Hear ye him. To the apostles the mission was directed in the form of breathing, to show forth the power of their ministry in the dispensation of the sacraments. And hence it was said, Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven. And again, under the sign of fiery tongues, to show forth the office of teaching, whence it is said that they began to speak with diverse tongues. The visible mission of the Holy Ghost was fittingly not sent to the fathers of the Old Testament, because the visible mission of the Son was to be accomplished before that of the Holy Ghost, since the Holy Ghost manifests the Son as the Son manifests the Father. Visible apparitions of the divine persons were, however, given to the fathers of the Old Testament, which, indeed, cannot be called visible missions, because, according to Augustine, they were not sent to designate the indwelling of the divine person by grace, but for the manifestation of something else. 8. Whether a divine person is sent only by the person whence he proceeds eternally. Objection 1. It would seem that a divine person is sent only by the one whence he proceeds eternally. For as Augustine says, the Father is sent by no one, because he is from no one. Therefore if a divine person is sent by another, he must be from that other. Objection 2. Further, the sender has authority over the one sent, but there can be no authority as regards a divine person except from origin. Therefore the divine person sent must proceed from the one sending. Objection 3. Further, if a divine person can be sent by one whence he does not proceed, then the Holy Ghost may be given by a man, although he proceeds not from him, which is contrary to what Augustine says. Therefore the divine person is sent only by the one whence he proceeds. On the contrary, the Son is sent by the Holy Ghost. According to Isaiah, Now the Lord God hath sent me and his Spirit, but the Son is not from the Holy Ghost. Therefore a divine person is sent by one from whom he does not proceed. I answer that there are different opinions on this point. Some say that the divine person is sent only by the one whence he proceeds eternally, and so when it is said that the Son of God is sent by the Holy Ghost, this is to be explained as regards his human nature by reason of which he was sent to preach by the Holy Ghost. Augustine, however, says that the Son is sent by himself and by the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost is sent by himself and by the Son. So that to be sent in God does not apply to each person, but only to the person proceeding from another, whereas to send belongs to each person. There is some truth in both of these opinions, because when a person is described as being sent, the person himself existing from another is designated with a visible or invisible effect applicable to the mission of the divine person. Thus if the sender be designated as the principle of the person sent, in this sense not each person sends, but that person only who is the principle of that person who is sent, and thus the Son is sent only by the Father, and the Holy Ghost by the Father and the Son. If, however, the person sending is understood as the principle of the effect implied in the mission, in that sense the whole Trinity sends the person sent. This reason does not prove that a man can send the Holy Ghost forasmuch as man cannot cause the effect of grace. The answers to the objections appear from the above.